Steve

As I understand him, Robert Leeson’s analysis rings true to me

You write :  “The "administration of property" is a reference to one's place
within the economic system - he's referring to entrepreneurs here, not
necessarily to those who have inherited wealth.”

The very modest entrepreneurial skills that got me through life were
completely lacking in my progeny, coal miners in the industrial north of
England and such like.  I have a strong recollection I got my understanding
of market activity aged around 10 from bible classes.  I rather think a
background amongst those who inherited wealth would have had big tangible
advantages.

But its the further hint - of a sort of duplicitous work around the matter
in Hayek - that most concerns me.  I believe Harcohen showed Popper ‘the
great philosopher’ to be largely Hayek’s creation.  And over decades I have
come to see that stratagem as a bait and switch.  

I signed up for an unravelling, via Open Society and it Enemies, of much of
philosophy as a kind of power conspiracy.  

But thenceforward I was given Critical Rationalism instead.

Where in Popper, or his pupils, was the very accessible analysis in OSE, an
analysis of power philosophy in its politico-historical context, followed
through?

Rob Tye, York, UK (no affiliation)